Because if we're going to try and stop the misuse of our favorite comics and their protagonists by the companies that write and publish them, we've got to see what both the printed and online comics news is doing wrong. This blog focuses on both the good and the bad, the newspaper media and the online websites. Unabashedly. Unapologetically. Scanning the media for what's being done right and what's being done wrong.

Friday, March 23, 2018

Jane Foster's been sacrificed for no good reason

At long last, the death of Marvel’s THOR has finally come. Way back in 2014, writer Jason Aaron introduced a brand new Thor – making headlines at first for making Thor a woman this time. It was hardly the first time Mjolnir had been wielded by someone other than the Odinson, but Aaron spun a clever tale, carefully holding back on the female Thor’s true identity for almost a year. Finally, he revealed that the new Thor was none other than Jane Foster, the Odinson’s classic love interest.

That revelation always meant Thor’s story had a time-limit imposed on it, and Marvel made no secret of Jane’s impending death. Jane Foster’s “worthiness” took the form of becoming Thor before dying of terminal cancer, sacrifice herself because she knew the world needed a god of thunder. Tragically, every time she transformed, the hammer’s magic negated the effect of her chemotherapy. Being a hero was literally killing her, but she continued to choose that path.

No mention of any political crap that found its way into the script, including a jab at the Gamergate campaign, and how strange that the same people who were upholding Jane as a female Thor a few years ago suddenly don't care anymore. Which just proves they were never fans of Stan Lee and Jack Kirby's rendition of the Norse Thunder God - let alone Jane - in the first place, and if Marvel hadn't gone out of their way, they wouldn't have cared about that either. It was never story merit that interested them, but rather, a chance to tear down cohesion in comicdom. And says who the story had a time limit imposed on it? If they wanted to and there was no disagreement, they'd keep on with it for years to come. Besides, these press sources originally gave it their full backing.

And why should knowledge or not of who the female Thor really is make it any good? It doesn't, and turning Jane into more than just a deity (which happened briefly in the late 60s), by shoving her into the role of her once-lover proper turns it all into more of a comedy-fest. Make her a deity, but it should be as her own agency, and they don't even have to give her a superhero codename to get the job done.

Next, wait'll you see what happens to the Uru hammer as much as Jane herself, as the site continues to fawn with such maddening treacle:

Thor #705 is a fitting end to Jane Foster’s story. It’s not possible to out-fight the Mangog, who was created to wreak vengeance upon the gods. Instead, Jane chooses to restrain the creature in a chain, which she fastens to Mjolnir. Then, bringing a final fateful end to the battle, she flings Mjolnir into the heart of the Sun itself – dragging the Mangog with it.

Thor must watch in horror as his enchanted hammer is destroyed, before realizing the enormity of what Jane has done: without Mjolnir in her hand, the female Thor will revert to human form once again. To defeat the gods, Jane destroyed her only chance at life.

Why is it a fitting end? Foster has no worthiness as a co-star? No less dumbfounding is that the magic hammer of Thor is destroyed, which would make it difficult to continue his own crimefighting career, if not for the fact the writers could conceive a new one. It gets more aggravating with the following justification:

The death of Jane Foster is a beautiful and poignant sacrifice; it’s also, in thematic terms, a death that turns the typical story upside-down. The Judaeo-Christian tradition stresses the sacrificial nature of God and his Son, and the Thor franchise has often toyed with a similar concept of “worthiness,” even on the big screen. In both Thor and Thor: The Dark World, it is Thor’s willingness to sacrifice himself that makes him worthy.

This time round, though, the Messianic story has been neatly inverted. It is the human who must give her life to save the gods; it is the capricious gods who must go on to prove themselves worthy of Jane Foster‘s sacrifice.

I'm sorry, but even this does not justify the notion of killing off Jane. But, they probably did it out of spite for fandom's rejection of Foster as a pawn in a diversity game. It gets no better with the following:

But Aaron has done more than just invert the Messianic tradition; the death of Jane Foster also continues the themes he’s been developing through his entire run. Back in 2013, Aaron introduced the character of Gorr, the God-Butcher (Marvel Studios adapted elements of the character for Hela’s powerset in Thor: Ragnarok). As a youth, Gorr had been brought up to believe in the gods – but they had never answered his prayers. Furious, he had launched a crusade against the gods, slaughtering them with the Necrosword. Even Thor was tempted to believe Gorr was right; “That gods were cruel and jealous creatures. That it was time for their age to pass.”

It sounds more like what we have here is a character who can't recognize why it helps to forge his own path without relying on pagan gods and prayers alone.

In 2014, a single whispered sentence from Nick Fury – who possessed the all-seeing knowledge of the Watchers – was enough to render Thor unworthy. Finally, in The Unworthy Thor #5, Aaron revealed what that sentence was; “Gorr was right.” That whispered truth seared itself into Thor’s heart, as he realized the gods of Asgard are unworthy; indeed, all the gods are. Mjolnir, too, acknowledged the truth.

The gods are not worthy; and yet Jane Foster is still willing to die on their behalf. [...]

So Thor's bunch on Asgard is unworthy in what way? Most likely as vessels for storytelling; is it any wonder they wasted years on meaningless nonsense? This all reeks of disdain for the very properties Aaron was given the keys to scripting. DC pulled similar stunts with the Amazons in Wonder Woman too, for that matter. It's truly ridiculous considering the deities in Thor were never depicted as utter saints, and neither were the Amazons.

The most sickening sight from this "finale" for Foster has to be the panel where she's shown dead in Thor's arms while her hair is gone from loss to cancer. As a fan of Jane Foster as much as the Marvel take on Thor, I find it most incredibly distasteful she's been sacrificed on the alter of PC, no thanks in part to the SJWs whose refusal to protest this terrible misuse only proves they never cared for her as a character, but rather, as a tool to exploit for undermining real, dedicated storytelling. Back in the Bronze Age, she'd already come into being a woman who could defend herself against violent maniacs, and that was enough; they didn't have to go to such lengths to make her into something so heavy-handed as a female Thor. This is all the result of increasing employment of hack writers who don't have a clue to what made past comicdom work far better, and who relied far too much on company wide crossovers to cover for their lack of talent. I realize reversing Jane's fate is entirely possible, but the PC advocates at Marvel, so long as they remain, are bound to make sure this weak storytelling status quo remains in place much like they've gone to such lengths to make sure Mary Jane Watson can never be Peter Parker's wife.

Good stories have beginnings, middles and ends; jane's end was telegraphed a bit too much in advance, but it would have been phony for her to have been miraculously cured. But she wasn't rejected by fandom; her book was Marvel's best selling title after the spider-men and Star Wars books.

About me

I'm Avi Green

From Jerusalem, Israel

I was born in Pennsylvania in 1974, and moved to Israel in 1983. I also enjoyed reading a lot of comics when I was young, the first being Fantastic Four. I maintain a strong belief in the public's right to knowledge and accuracy in facts. I like to think of myself as a conservative-style version of Clark Kent. I don't expect to be perfect at the job, but I do my best.